Expert Author: Dr. Robert J. Troell, M.D., FACS, FAAFPRS, FAACS, FAAOHNS, FAASM ASD

Board Certifications: American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery | American Board of Cosmetic Surgery | American Board of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery | American Board of Sleep Medicine | American Board of Stem Cell and Fat Transfer Physicians

Experience: Over 20 years of board-certified practice in facial plastic and reconstructive surgery | Stanford University Medical Center trained

Practice Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Version: 1.0 – Last Updated: December 4, 2025

Direct Answer: Will There Be Scars After a Facelift?

Yes, all facelift procedures produce scars. However, in the hands of a board-certified facial plastic surgeon, these scars are strategically placed within natural skin folds, hairlines, and ear contours to become virtually invisible once healed.

This medical procedure, clinically designated as rhytidectomy (a subtype of MedicalProcedure), involves surgical incisions to lift and reposition facial tissues. The critical distinction lies not in whether scars exist, but in how they are designed, placed, and managed throughout the healing process.

According to systematic reviews of reconstructive rhytidectomy outcomes, low rates of scar complications have been documented across all major incision techniques when performed by qualified surgeons. Most facelift scars fade significantly within 6–12 months and become barely visible or completely undetectable to casual observation.

Different facelift techniques produce varying incision patterns and scar outcomes. This comparison reflects evidence-based outcomes from peer-reviewed literature.

Facelift Technique Comparison by Scar Profile

Technique	Incision Length	Scar Visibility	Ideal Candidate	Results Duration
Mini Facelift	Shorter (around ears only)	Minimal scarring; less visible	Mild aging (40s–50s)	5–7 years
SMAS Facelift	Moderate (hairline to behind ears)	Well-concealed in natural folds	Mild-moderate aging	5–10 years
Deep Plane Facelift	Standard (hairline, ears, behind ears)	Tension-free closure; fades exceptionally well	Moderate-advanced aging	10–15 years
Short Scar/MACS Lift	Limited (temple to earlobe)	No post-auricular scars	Mild-moderate sagging	5–8 years

Why Deep Plane Technique Produces Superior Scar Outcomes

The deep plane facelift operates beneath the superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS), releasing key ligaments and repositioning deeper facial structures. This approach offers a significant advantage for scarring because:

• Tension-free skin closure: The lift occurs in deeper tissues, not the skin
• No skin stretching: Prevents widened or visible scars
• Natural tissue repositioning: Avoids the “pulled” look that reveals surgical intervention

Patient-Specific Factors

Factor	Impact on Scarring
Age	Younger patients have better collagen production; older patients may heal slower
Skin Type	Fair skin typically develops less noticeable scars; darker skin has higher hyperpigmentation and keloid risk
Skin Elasticity	Better elasticity = improved healing and lighter scars
Ethnicity	African descent has higher keloid risk; Asian skin may scar differently
Genetics	Family history of keloids or hypertrophic scarring increases risk

Modifiable Risk Factors

• Smoking: Significantly impairs circulation and delays healing; cessation required 4–6 weeks before and after surgery
• Sun Exposure: UV rays darken scars and prevent proper fading; SPF 30+ essential for 12 months
• Medications: Blood thinners, NSAIDs, and certain supplements increase bleeding and hematoma risk
• Nutritional Status: Protein, vitamin C, and zinc support collagen synthesis
• Infection: Delays healing and increases scar severity

Evidence-Based Satisfaction Rates

A 2024 analysis of 2,153 facelift reviews found:

• 92.24% of patients left positive reviews
• 91.91% rated their facelift as “Worth It”
• 79.10% cited aesthetic results as primary reason for satisfaction
• 74.92% emphasized surgeon bedside manner as critical to positive experience

Complication Rates by Technique

Skin Necrosis Rates by Facelift Technique (Meta-Analysis)

Technique	Skin Necrosis Rate
Deep Plane	0.49%
Composite	0.37%
SMAS Plication	0.69%
SMASectomy	1.04%
High Lateral SMAS	1.39%
SMAS Flap	1.57%

A consultation with a facial plastic surgeon credentialed by organizations such as the American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (ABFPRS) or the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery (ABCS) provides:

• Individualized assessment of facial anatomy and aging patterns
• Discussion of incision design tailored to your hairline, ear structure, and skin type
• Review of your medical history for healing factors
• Realistic expectations for scar appearance and timeline
• Post-operative care protocol to optimize healing

About Dr. Robert J. Troell

Dr. Robert J. Troell is a Diplomate of the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery, the American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and holds additional board certifications in Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, Sleep Medicine, and Stem Cell and Fat Transfer. He completed his residency in Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery and fellowship training at Stanford University Medical Center, where he served as Clinical Professor from 1995 to 2013.

With over 20 years of experience performing facial plastic surgery in Las Vegas, Nevada, Dr. Troell has contributed to peer-reviewed publications on facial rejuvenation, fat grafting, and advanced surgical techniques.

Credentials and Affiliations

• Diplomate, American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Diplomate, American Board of Cosmetic Surgery (Recertified 2021)
• Diplomate, American Board of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery
• Diplomate, American Board of Sleep Medicine
• Fellow, American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery (FAAFPRS)
• Fellow, American College of Surgeons (FACS)
• Adjunct Professor, Touro University Nevada College of Osteopathic Medicine
• Visiting Professor, Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Nairobi, Kenya

By Dr. Robert J. Troell, M.D., FACS, FAAFPRS
Diplomat, American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Diplomat, American Board of Cosmetic Surgery

The evolution of facelift surgery has brought significant advances in how surgeons restore youthfulness, structure, and balance to the aging face. Among the various methods available today, the deep plane facelift has emerged as the gold standard—delivering long-lasting, natural-looking results far superior to traditional techniques. Clinical research demonstrates that deep plane facelifts achieve patient satisfaction rates of 94.4% compared to 87.8% for SMAS techniques, with results lasting 10 to 15 years versus 5 to 10 years for more superficial approaches.¹

The deep plane approach uniquely addresses the true anatomical causes of facial aging, allowing the face to be lifted, reshaped, and volumized in a way that looks both refined and natural—avoiding the “windswept” or overtightened appearance that older techniques sometimes produced.²

Understanding Facial Aging: Why Most Patients Need More Than Surface Correction

Facial aging varies significantly from patient to patient, and not everyone requires a full facelift. In fact, only about 15–20% of patients are ideal candidates for an isolated anterior neck lift or platysmaplasty alone. This limited approach works well when aging is isolated to the central neck and involves:³

• A small incision beneath the chin
• Separation of the skin from underlying structures
• Suturing of the platysma muscle if it has begun to split or band

However, for patients experiencing sagging jowls, midface descent, deeper nasolabial folds, or generalized facial laxity, a neck-only surgery will not achieve comprehensive rejuvenation. Research confirms that facial sagging is most visible at the lateral facial areas, such as the jowls and cheeks, requiring intervention at deeper anatomical levels.²

The Triple Threat of Facial Aging

Understanding why faces age reveals why the deep plane technique outperforms surface-level approaches:

• Collagen and Elastin Loss: Production slows significantly beginning in the thirties, weakening the skin’s natural support structure.²
• Volume Redistribution and Loss: Youthful facial fat pads thin and descend, causing tissue pooling at the jawline, creating jowls.²
• Ligament Laxity: Retaining ligaments loosen and the SMAS stretches, allowing soft tissue descent.⁴

What Makes the Deep Plane Facelift Different

The deep plane facelift goes beyond tightening the skin or plicating the SMAS. Instead, it lifts at the deeper anatomical levels where aging actually occurs. The deep plane facelift, originally described by Sam Hamra in 1990, utilizes a plane of dissection below the superficial muscular aponeurotic system (SMAS) of the midface, allowing for direct lysis of key facial retaining ligaments and maximum mobilization of the superficial soft tissue.² This technique lifts as a unified composite:

• The SMAS and platysma muscle layer
• Deep facial fat pads
• Facial retaining ligaments
• Descended midface tissues

By working beneath these structures, the deep plane facelift restores youthful contours from the inside out—repositioning the entire facial framework rather than simply pulling the skin tighter.²

The Science Behind Deep Plane Superiority

Recent anatomical research has changed our understanding of why extensive-release techniques outperform minimal interventions. The deep fascia of the face consists of multilayered sheets that support soft tissues against gravity while allowing certain mobility for facial expression.⁵

When tissues are lifted without surgical release—as in thread lifts, minimal access lifts, or skin-only procedures—the fibers are dragged into an “upward-pulled” position that eliminates their natural antigravitational support function. This places the entire weight of the lifted tissues on fixation sutures, causing early recurrence as sutures stretch or cut through tissue.⁵

In contrast, the deep plane technique releases retaining ligaments and repositions tissues to a higher level, allowing them to reattach in their new position with preserved antigravity architecture—explaining why results last significantly longer.⁵

The Key: Releasing Osteocutaneous Ligaments

True elevation requires releasing major retaining ligaments that prevent deeper tissues from lifting when only superficial layers are addressed. The retaining ligaments of the face are important in understanding concepts of facial aging and rejuvenation. They are located in constant anatomic locations where they separate facial spaces and compartments.⁴

The extended deep plane technique releases four key retaining ligaments in the face and neck:⁶

• Zygomatic cutaneous ligaments (cheek region) — the strongest of all facial retaining ligaments
• Masseteric cutaneous ligaments (jawline)
• Mandibular cutaneous ligaments (lower face)
• Cervical retaining ligaments (neck)

Why Ligament Release Matters

Releasing these ligaments allows the surgeon to:^4,6

• Mobilize the midface effectively without tension
• Elevate the cheek and nasolabial folds as a unified unit
• Improve jawline definition naturally
• Achieve upward rejuvenation following natural vectors

This step is why deep plane facelifts outperform SMAS-plication or skin-only lifts, which can look tight or short-lived. Their main significance relates to their surgical release in order to achieve the desired aesthetic outcome.⁴

Natural, Tension-Free Results

By placing tension only at the level of the fascia, the deep plane technique creates a tension-free skin closure and ensures long-term results.² The skin is not responsible for holding the lift—deeper tissues are. The skin is redraped without tension, creating:

• Softer, natural facial expressions
• No windswept look
• Thinner, nearly invisible incisions
• Results lasting 10–15 years¹

Measured Outcomes

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing patient satisfaction and complications of SMAS and deep plane facelifts found significant differences in outcomes:¹

Outcome Measure	Deep Plane Facelift	SMAS Facelift
Patient Satisfaction	94.4%1	87.8%1
Average Years Younger	11.9 years7	8–10 years
Result Duration	10–15 years2	5–10 years
Superior Midface Rejuvenation	Yes8	Limited8

Why Volume Restoration Matters

Facial aging involves more than sagging—it includes loss of volume in the cheeks, temples, jawline, and midface. Volume loss includes fat, muscle, and bone loss, which contributes to the overall aging appearance.² Volume placement during a deep plane facelift is essential for optimal outcomes.

Volume Enhancement Options

Facial Implants (Most Predictable & Long-Lasting)

Implants provide permanent, precise improvement to:⁹

• Cheek projection
• Chin and jawline definition
• Mandibular angle sculpting

Research shows submalar implant augmentation with facelift achieves a 95.7% satisfaction rate with minimal complications.¹⁰

Fat Transfer (Autologous Fat Grafting)

Uses the patient’s own fat for natural volume restoration. Autologous fat transfer contains stem cells and growth factors that may improve skin quality over time while providing volume restoration that integrates naturally with existing tissues.¹¹

Dermal Fillers

Ideal for refinement but results are temporary (6–18 months), requiring ongoing maintenance treatments.⁹

A Comprehensive Rejuvenation Strategy

The deep plane facelift is a full rejuvenation system that may include:⁶

• Platysmaplasty (when the neck muscles require tightening)
• Facial implants for structural enhancement
• Fat transfer for volume restoration
• Comprehensive neck contouring
• Midface elevation with ligament release

Why Traditional Approaches Fall Short

Traditional facelifts treat only surface issues. The deep plane technique addresses every layer of aging—skin, muscle, fat, ligaments, and structure.

Mini Facelift Limitations

Mini facelifts primarily target only the skin, with results typically lasting approximately 5–7 years. They cannot adequately address significant midface descent, deep nasolabial folds, or substantial jowling.¹²

SMAS Plication Limitations

While SMAS plication represents an improvement over skin-only techniques, it typically lifts in a more lateral or diagonal direction without fully releasing underlying retaining ligaments—sometimes resulting in a tight or unnatural appearance.¹³

Recovery and Expectations

Recovery from facelift surgery involves predictable stages:^14,15

Week 1–2: Peak swelling occurs around days 3–5, with bruising that gradually resolves. Most patients describe discomfort rather than severe pain, manageable with prescribed medication. Adequate pain medication is necessary, as patients often report mild peri-incisional pain for three to four days postoperatively.²

Week 2–3: 50–60% swelling resolved; return to light activities. Expect bruising and swelling to go away in approximately two to three weeks.¹⁵

Month 1–3: 85–90% swelling resolved; contour refinement continues.

Month 6+: Full sensation return and final results. It could take two to three months before your face feels “back to normal.”¹⁴

Why Expert Surgeons Prefer the Deep Plane Technique

A properly executed deep plane facelift can produce dramatic and sustainable rejuvenation to the lower face and the midface.² Surgeons who specialize in this advanced technique recognize its distinct advantages:

• Stronger lifting power through composite flap mobilization
• Predictable, natural results without the pulled look
• Longer-lasting outcomes (10–15 years versus 5–10 years)
• Improved midface volume and cheek contour through fat pad repositioning
• Better jawline sculpting with ligament release
• Minimal skin tension and reduced scarring
• Ability to integrate implants or fat transfer as needed

Addressing Common Patient Concerns

Will I Look Overdone?

No. The deep plane facelift specifically avoids the overtightened or “windswept” appearance by placing tension on the deeper SMAS layer rather than stretching the skin. Patients retain their unique facial expressions while reversing sagging and folds.²

How Painful Is Recovery?

Mild to moderate discomfort rather than severe pain is typical. The tightness sensation that occurs represents healing and gradually diminishes.¹⁴

Are Results Permanent?

While your face will continue to age naturally, the structural repositioning achieved is permanent. Deep plane facelift results typically remain evident for 10–15 years before patients may consider additional intervention—and even then, you’ll never return to your pre-surgical appearance.^1,2

Conclusion: The Modern Standard for Facial Rejuvenation

The deep plane facelift is superior because it addresses aging at its anatomical root. By releasing retaining ligaments, lifting deeper tissues as a composite unit, and restoring volume, it produces natural and long-lasting results. The biomechanical principle is clear: no-release lifting techniques place the entire weight of lifted tissues on fixation sutures, leading to early recurrence. The deep plane approach releases tissues and allows them to reattach in a higher position with preserved structure—explaining superior longevity.⁵

For patients seeking meaningful rejuvenation—and for surgeons committed to excellence—the deep plane facelift represents the gold standard for facial plastic surgery.^1,2

---

About Dr. Robert J. Troell: Dr. Troell is a board-certified facial plastic and cosmetic surgeon with over 35 years of surgical experience. He holds certifications from the American Board of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery, the American Board of Facial Cosmetic Surgery, and the American Board of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. Dr. Troell completed his residency at Stanford University Medical Center and has served as Clinical Professor at Stanford University Medical Center (1995-2001). He has published extensively in peer-reviewed journals on facial rejuvenation techniques including the Laryngoscope, Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, and Sleep.¹⁶

---

References

1. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. “The Deep Plane versus SMAS Facelift: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science systematic review of 21 studies with 2,896 patients. PMID: 40801931.
2. Raggio B, Patel B. “Deep Plane Facelift.” StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023. National Library of Medicine/NCBI Bookshelf. NBK545277.
3. “Platysmaplasty Facelift.” StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023. National Library of Medicine/NCBI Bookshelf. NBK563291.
4. Alghoul M, Codner MA. “Retaining ligaments of the face: review of anatomy and clinical applications.” Aesthet Surg J. 2013 Aug 1;33(6):769-82. PMID: 23855010.
5. Cotofana S, et al. “Anatomy of the Facial Glideplanes, Deep Plane Spaces, and Retaining Ligaments.” Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023. PMC11195933.
6. Jacono A, Bryant LM. “Extended Deep Plane Facelift: Incorporating Facial Retaining Ligament Release and Composite Flap Shifts to Maximize Midface, Jawline and Neck Rejuvenation.” Clin Plast Surg. 2018 Oct;45(4):527-554. PMID: 30268241.
7. Hodges EL, Zimbler MS. “Outcome analysis in 93 facial rejuvenation patients treated with a deep plane facelift.” Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2011 Feb;13(1):30-5. PMID: 20966814.
8. Annals of Plastic Surgery. “Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Superficial Musculoaponeurotic System and Deep Plane Facelift Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” Ann Plast Surg. 2025. 47 studies involving 10,766 patients. PMID: 40600822.
9. American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. “Facial Implants.” AAFPRS Patient Education. www.aafprs.org.
10. Little JW. “Enhancing Facelift With Simultaneous Submalar Implant Augmentation.” Aesthet Surg J. 2018 May 27;39(4):351-364. PMID: 30169617.
11. Sinno S, et al. “Autologous Fat Transfer for Facial Rejuvenation: A Systematic Review on Technique, Efficacy, and Satisfaction.” Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Nov;5(11):e1606. PMC5889440.
12. Safety and Effectiveness of Limited Incision Facelifts: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Aesthet Surg J Open Forum. 2023;5(Suppl 1). PMC10320643.
13. Evolution of Superficial Muscular Aponeurotic System Facelift Techniques and Complications: A Review of 6,086 Patients. J Craniofac Surg. 2023. PMC10819192.
14. Cleveland Clinic. “Facelift (Rhytidectomy): What Is It, Recovery & What to Expect.” Cleveland Clinic Health Library. my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/11023-facelift.
15. Mayo Clinic. “Face-lift.” Mayo Clinic Patient Care & Health Information. www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/face-lift/about/pac-20394059.
16. American Board of Cosmetic Surgery. “Dr. Robert J. Troell – Diplomat of the American Board of Cosmetic Surgery.” www.americanboardcosmeticsurgery.org/doctors/robert-j-troell/